Non-locality in Nature and Cognition
F. David Peat
Abstract
An exploration of the meaning of non-locality is made in
physics and thought. It is suggested that non-local correlations
may play an essential role within the nature.
Introduction
The prime mover of the Copenhagen Interpretation of
Quantum Theory, Neils Bohr, took pains to stress the
essential wholeness of quantum phenomena. As a direct
result of the indivisibility of the quantum of action, each
experiment or observation of the quantum domain must be
taken as an unanalyzable whole. Bohr's interpretation of the
quantum theory had the effect of introducing a radically new
idea into science, for up to that time it had been natural to
define material bodies in terms of their properties and, in
particular, their locations in space. Their behavior was then
described in terms of the various forces operating between
them which caused them to move or change their states. But
now Bohr was denying the validity of this whole approach for,
at the quantum mechanical level, he argued, bodies in
interaction form a single, indissoluble whole.
More recently this quantum holism has been underscored by
the various experimental tests of Bell's Theorem.1 In essence
they indicate that two quantum particles--initially in interaction
but now well separated in space must be represented by a
single inseparable state. This notion of this inherent
inseparability has led a number of authors to argue that a
basic non-locality is essential to a quantum theoretical
description of nature.
Is this non-locality something that can be added to
conventional quantum mechanics or is a radically different
approach required? Is it possible to develop a description of
non-separability within a purely local theory, or does non-
locality represent a complementary form of description to that
of locality? Could it be that the concept of space is far richer
than physics has hitherto supposed, so that it contains a whole
series of properties? And would this imply that physics should
move to some deeper theory in which both locality and non-
locality emerge as limiting forms?
This essay is an attempt to explore, in very general terms,
such a complementary description and to ask what may be
meant by non-locality, not only in quantum physics, but very
generally in other forms of thought and activity. Its aim is to
open up the discussion of non-locality, to allow for other
complementary views of space, time and causality, and to call
for a formal development of new concepts. For, it is
suggested, non-locality may indeed play a significant role in
mind and nature.
Locality
For well over two hundred years locality has been
fundamental to our way of looking at the physical world.
Indeed it is so deeply ingrained in scientific thinking that a
non-local form of interaction appears, in Einstein's words, as
"spooky".2
A local description gives central position to the concepts of
location and separation in space. Bodies are defined in terms
of their spatial position and the trajectories they make. In turn,
this description is founded upon the idea of a continuous
manifold--a coordinate grid created out of dimensionless
space (or space-time) points. Moreover, this manifold is
supposed to exist prior to bodies and fields. Indeed it has an
important ontological significance for, since the time of Clifford
and Einstein there have been theoretical attempts to build
fields and matter out of its geometry. A continuous space-time
therefore becomes the ground out of which the entire physical
world is to be built.
To reject locality would therefore be to throw away the full
potential of this underlying manifold. In addition, physicists
would be forced to abandon a whole range of rich and
powerful mathematics. This latter action would, in itself,
involve a major revolution in science. But the idea of locality
goes even deeper for it pervades the whole of physics in an
almost subliminal way. Indeed even the attempt to discuss
non-locality runs into difficulties with the very language we
speak. Terms like space, distance, location and separation
have all become colored by several hundred years of thinking
about space in a particular way. There does not even exist a
word to describe the concept we are now exploring--except in
terms of the negation of "locality". Locality has become so
deeply ingrained in the thinking of physicists that it now seems
impossible to abandon it. Nevertheless, in the next section I
will argue that non-locality is in many ways a more natural way
of looking at the world and is certainly not alien to our deepest
thinking.
Despite the authority inherent in the locality of space-time,
evidence is accumulating that it is an inappropriate way to
describe quantum theory. Neils Bohr has called for a holistic
approach to quantum phenomena, while Pauli and others felt
that conventional concepts of space and time are inadequate
for a quantum description. Current discussions of Bell's
Theorem suggest that we may be forced to entertain
complementary non-local descriptions-- although it may also
be possible to develop purely local theories which forbid
separability of certain quantum states.
To this must be added the notion of global quantum states.
The wave function for a superconductor, and other condensed
states, is defined over macrosopic dimensions. This suggests
that a more natural description may involve what could be
called a global rather than a local mathematics.
Elsewhere I have argued3 that quantum theory is
characterized by the importance given to the overall form of
the wave function, and this form is essentially a property of the
whole system. An example of this would be the Pauli
Exclusion Principle that demands an overall symmetry for a
wave function that extends over all space. It is this global form,
or symmetry, that plays a role in deriving Bell's correlations, for
it dictates that the wave function cannot be spit into a simple
product of independent terms associated with different
locations in space. A global form, I have argued, is a general
requirement of which the Bell theorem is only one example.
While Schrodinger's wave mechanics and quantum field
theory are formulated using local mathematics based on an
underlying continuous manifold of space-time points, there are
powerful arguments suggesting that such a manifold can not
have an actual physical existence. The energy content of small
regions approaching the Planck length is so high as to break
down space-time structure into regions of extremely high
curvature or even into a space-time "foam". Clearly the notion
of dimensionless points is incompatible with quantum theory.
Does the answer lie in some modification of our current
approach, such as replacing space-time points by extended
objects like strings-- or is some more radical departure
needed?
Non-locality
Bohm and Hiley4 have pointed out that physicists feel such a
degree of revulsion towards non-locality that "they would
prefer not to consider the idea even as a possibility".
However, I would argue that, despite this prejudice, the idea
of non-locality is perfectly natural and pervades much of our
thinking. While it is certainly true that in the past locality and
causality have been enormously useful in physics this does
necessarily rule out any other approach, or even the possibility
that space may be described in a number of different,
complementary ways. The human mind is perfectly capable of
accommodating different and even paradoxical viewpoints
together.
Inseparability, an oceanic sense, a feeling of oneness with all
nature and a direct communion with others are given high
value in all cultures. Poets and mystics have attempted to
explore in words and image their feeling of immediate contact
with all things. Such a sense of connection appears to lie
outside the confines of space and time and resonates deeply
with our experience of the world. Indeed, I would argue that
the cluster of concepts surrounding non-locality have much to
do with the operation of the mind and brain. We can begin to
see this by considering how the world is dealt with in art and
literature.
Much of the world's art is concerned with a non-local
representation of space. Early paintings were able to integrate
may different viewpoints or "perspectives" of the same event.
In a painting of the life of a saint, for example, this enfoldement
or overlaying took place not only in space but also in time, for
events occurring at different periods are presented together.
Even during the Renaissance, paintings of the crucifixion
combine together what could be called "divine" and "secular"
space. A painting is more concerned with relationship than
with absolute location. Its integrating force comes more from
color, movement, thrust, gesture and shape rather than from
position within some background "scientific" space. Pictorial
space, in this view is particularly rich, it varies in its properties
from place to place so that the viewer becomes a participator
within the scene rather than an external observer.5
Such paintings treat space in a more profoundly different yet
entirely natural way than is suggested by a "realistic painting"
in which, generally speaking, space is portrayed from single
viewpoint. This latter view had its origin in the development of
perspective during the early Renaissance. The end result in
hands of a painter like David, working in the late eighteenth
century, is a sort of snapshot or "tableau" in which motion and
change is frozen in a single instant of time and presented from
the unique perspective of the artist, the objective viewer of the
scene. In this way a purely local view of space had been born.
Space becomes the supreme arbiter, the ground out of which
relationship and structure is born. Yet it is a space defined
from only one viewpoint which dominates the painting. It is not
difficult to see the origin of this new objectivity in the rise of the
individual, for it also heralds the appearance of the concerto,
the novel and the diarist. Moreover it is persuasive to trace a
development from perspective, through the perspective grid
used by painters such as Durer to the coordinate grid of
Descartes and our modern theory of local space.
In our own century painting has returned to the non-local
order. Mainly as a result of Cezanne, space became richer,
with many different perspectives and viewpoints being
overlaid together. In Cezanne a sinvle fixed space does not
dominate the painting. Rather each form has its own order and
the whole is integrated together in a strikingly truthful way.
Space emerges out of much deeper considerations and is the
expression of the whole painting. Painting has escaped the
seduction of a particular narrow world view and returned to its
earlier and more natural way of experiencing the world--an
experience that is essentially complementary.
Research on visual perception confirms this view for it
suggests that our knowledge of the world is built out of
complementary movements. What we see is the result of a
complicated collection of processes involving eye movements
and the relevation of different aspects of a scene--edges,
colors, moving planes,etc.-- which are then processed
independently in different parts of the visual cortex. The
building of space, through neurological processing is
complementary. All this suggests that space is never
experienced as prior, or in any way divorced from events and
occurrences. The notion of space as being the ground or
backdrop out of which geometrical relationships and the world
is built is alien to the very way we experience the world.
Rather the notion of space is something that emerges out of a
deeper and more complex experience and is essentially
inseparable from other aspects of this experience.
Not only visual perception but also thought itself has a similar
complex, overlaid quality which demands complementary
viewpoints, including what could be loosely termed "non-
local". It is true that certain aspects of thought have a relatively
"causal" or "mechanical" order. An example of this would be
the experience of a "train of thought" in which one thought
appears to follow immediately on the other, the whole being
triggered by some word or memory. Yet in their other aspects
our experiences of the world enfold and overlap, they
blossom and unfold out of each other rather than following in
any linear causal fashion. A thought may seem to grow out of
the center of another thought and to embrace other, more
distant thoughts and feelings.
A musical phrase is not apprehended as a sequence of notes
but as a whole melody--indeed if it is played too slowly its
shape becomes meaningless. Likewise an entire poem or a
piece of music may appear to its creator all of a piece: it is a
single, undivided whole and only later unfolded in a linear
fashion. Clearly such experiences call for a global description.
Moreover at the physiological level it appears that physical
memory itself is not localized within any one region of the
brain (although memories may be processed within the
hippocampus) but involves some sort of non-local distribution.
Memory itself can be triggered by a word, a fleeting taste or
smell which evokes a whole world of experience. This whole
aspect of memory has been thoroughly researched and
discussed by the writer Marcel Proust. Moreover Proust has
described the experience of space. He evokes a sense of
many different locations being overlaid and interpenetrating
one another.
While it would be possible to go into thought, experience and
perception at much greater length these few brief examples
do suggest that our experience of space, events and
processes cannot be described by any single viewpoint,
rather some form of complementarity is demanded which
would include some sort of non-locality as one of its aspects.
Communication
Communication, I would suggest, is a paradigm case which
cries out for a non-local description. The image of distinct,
localized bodies in interaction pervades not only
communications theory but systems theory, linguistics,
psychology, physics and discussions of the mind-body
question. This common view is essentially dualistic with the
bodies, or systems, being treated as distinct from the
interaction, signal or message that passes between them. In
physics material bodies are passive and are acted on by an
interaction. In communications theory a message passes, like
cargo on a train, between transmitter and receiver where it is
decoded.
In essence this whole approach to communication sustains
the mechanistic view of the world with its causality,
separability, locality and the absolute distinction between
matter and information. Yet this entire view is totally at odds
with our experience. Separability is only a limiting case of
something more general -- a whole dynamic movement of
meaning between two participants.
The prevalent notion of communication is also at odds with the
spirit of quantum theory for the indivisibility of the quantum of
action means that there can be no separation, no analysis,
between transmitter and receiver since the entire system must
be treated as an inseparable whole. This essential
inseparability has been confirmed by the many experimental
tests of Bell's Theorem and, more recently, by the
development of what has been called a quantum
communication device, in which a receiver and transmitter are
linked by a weak beam of coherent light. Any attempt to
interfere or modify this quantum communication results in an
uncontrollable disruption of the whole system.
Communication or interaction at the quantum level operates
as an unified whole, but this wholeness is not confined to
quantum phenomena is also an essential characteristic of
human communication. In any dialogue between two people
the meaning cannot be associated exclusively with either
participant, neither does it reside in the worlds that flow
between them. Rather this meaning arises out of the whole
activity of the discussion--indeed it goes further for the
meaning unfolds out of the context in which the discussion
takes place and out of the whole social structure in which
language is used. In this sense meaning could be said to be
"non-local", or rather to depend upon an extended context that
cannot be localized within either participant. While a local
analysis in terms of "transmitter", "receiver" and "code" may be
of some limited use it cannot capture the whole essence of the
dialogue.
Ford and I6 have drawn attention to this analogy between
human communication and the quantum wholeness of
observer and observed. The recent linguistic theory of "mental
spaces"7, for example, stresses the essentially creative nature
of communication. The listener is not a passive object acted
on by the message, or a simple decoder of syntax and
semantics. Listening and talking are creative acts in which
whole mental spaces are built in a highly active way. A single
word or phrase can trigger the creative construction of some
new "mental space" so that meaning is constantly flowing
backward and forward between the two speakers. The
meaning of the word is, like a quantum, indivisible and
belongs neither to speaker or listener but to the whole
creative act of communication.
Not only should communication demand an new holistic
treatment but it also denies the absolute distinction between
message and object. Meaning unfolds within thought, the
meaning of a word resonates throughout the body giving rise
to thoughts, emotions, feelings, physiological changes, fresh
arrangements of the muscles, changes in heart beat and
breathing and the disposition to further verbal action. Meaning,
therefore, is neither exclusively mental, nor physical, but both.
The word is an abstract concept--a sign-- but is also
soundwaves, thought and physical activity within the body, it is
inseparably all of these things. I would also suggest that this
image of the wholeness of communication and the
inseparability of the signifier and the signified can be applied
metaphorically to the natural world. Communication becomes
physical interaction between material objects, and the
movement of meaning though society or the human body.
Mathematical Forms
In the previous sections we have argued that non-locality and
inseparability are generally more characteristic of the way we
experience the world than locality and what could be termed
linear causality. In the section following this one we shall
speculate that non-locality plays a pervasive role in the
physical universe. But before doing so we shall enquire as to
what sort of mathematical descriptions of this non-locality
exist.
David Bohm and his co-workers8 have demonstrated how it is
possible to develop a quantum physics of non-separability
using an underlying local mathematics. Bohm's curious
quantum potential is determined by the wave function for the
whole system, ideally by the wave function for the entire
universe. It acts on a quantum particle in such a way that its
effect is not determined by the size of the potential but rather
by its form. But this means that distant objects can still exert a
strong effect on the particle--in essence the motion of the
particle is determined by the whole experimental situation
including the orientations of quite distant objects.
In this sense the behavior of each part of the system is
determined by the whole. Bohm's quantum potential implies
that quantum states are basically inseparable and it allows for
the non-local correlations of Bell's Theorem, and the sort of
quantum wholeness stressed by Bohr. Nevertheless the
potential itself, and indeed the wave function, is described
locally using the familiar mathematics of differential equations
and a continuous manifold. This suggests that the physical
manifestation of wholeness and inseparability can be
produced out of a purely local substratum.
Similar images arise in non-local systems. A vortex is an
expression of the non-linearity of a fast flowing river. It has the
appearance of an isolated object for it is located in a well
defined region of space, persists for a given time and may
even appear to interact with other objects in the river.
Nevertheless the vortex has, in a deeper sense, a non-local
origin for it arises out of the movement of the whole river. The
vortex is a particular example of the more general case of
solitons which act as if they were ordinary material bodies and
even may appear to interact with each other yet which have a
common origin in some underlying non-local ground. At one
level the soliton, the vortex and, indeed, two communicating
systems have a local, causal description--at another they
become one with the ground that gives birth to them.
While the quantum potential and the soliton can be discussed
using purely local mathematics, on the other hand David Bohm
has provided a powerful non-local metaphor for such systems
that he calls the Implicate (or enfolded) Order.9 What we take
for reality, Bohm argues, are surface phenomena, explicate
forms that have temporarily unfolded out of an underlying
implicate order. Within this deeper order forms are enfolded
within each other so systems which may be well separated in
the Explicate Order are contained within each other in the
Implicate Order. Within the Implicate Order one form can be
both interior and exterior to another.
In a superficial sense the Implicate and Explicate Orders
could be seen as dual forms related by an integral transform.
Yet Bohm gives the Implicate Order a much deeper status and
suggests that it is the ground out of which reality emerges.
Indeed there may be a whole hierarchy of implicate orders,
each more subtle than the other. The Implicate Order
therefore provides a powerful image of a general sort of non-
locality which may apply not only to a discussion of the
material world but also to the activity of mind. However this
approach still remains to be developed mathematically.
The duality between local and non-local forms is to some
extent displayed in projective geometry where an extended
object, like a line may be dual to a point, or a line dual to a
plane. Roger Penrose has developed a particularly powerful
treatment of non-local forms in his Twistor Theory.10 In this
case space is built not out of points but from extended objects
called twistors. A space-time point now becomes a complex
object, generated by the congruence of twistors. But, as
Penrose points out, this is exactly the experience of space
given to us by elementary particle physics for tiny regions of
space are probed by elementary particles shooting in from
different directions. Indeed the smaller the region to be
explored, the higher the energy that must be used and the
larger the elementary particle accelerators employed. In this
sense small regions of space-time have a complementary,
global aspect.
In Penrose's twistor description the properties of space are
particularly rich and may be contrasted with the usual
approach to geometry in which space-time points are
featureless and primitive. Penrose's twistor mathematics is a
powerful starting point for the non-local discussion of fields
and gravity. Penrose also holds out the hope that the quantum
measurement problem, i.e. the so-called "collapse of the
wave function", the curious double slit experiment and Bell's
correlations may be discussed in a basically non-local way.
Speculations
By seriously considering the ideas of non-locality, not only in
the quantum theory but in a much wider context, it may be
possible to develop a conception of nature that integrates
more deeply with our own perception, thought and
experience. Moreover, it may lead to a much deeper
understanding of nature. Non-locality is not simply a matter of
substituting, for the continuous manifold of space, some new
mathematical formalism. It is intimately connected with the
whole notion of causality, force and interaction, and with the
definition of material bodies. Indeed to contemplate non-
locality is to entertain a radically different conception of the
universe.
We have noted, for example, how existing treatments of
communication are intimately tied to notions of separability
and causality. Yet to consider the alternative viewpoint, in
which the meaning of a dialogue emerges out of the whole
context, and which takes account of the basic wholeness of
the activity, may be remarkably fruitful. Indeed it may help in
understanding the relationship between mind and body, mind
and matter, for the communicator and the communicated
would no longer be considered as distinct.
One approach would be to explore the possibility of non-
locality in physics, beginning at the quantum level. In the
previous section we met Penrose's twistors. It was the original
aim of that research project to derive space-time as a limit or
approximation to the underlying global twistor space. A local
space-time may turn out to be simply a limit that appears at a
certain scale of distance. Or, as Penrose believes,
manifestations of non-locality are present at all scales. We
could speculate, for example, that what we term "space" has a
rich complementary structure so that, just as "wave" or
"particle" are manifestations within different experimental
contexts so that locality or non-locality may also be context
dependent. Indeed space itself may not be a single concept
but involve a richly enfolded structure.
In his general theory of relativity Einstein gave the image of
local co-ordinate patches which join up to generate a curved
space-time. By contrast, the image of non-locality calls for
something closer to an overlaying of transparencies as is the
case with a color photograph to be printed in a book. Each
region of space would then be generated by a superposition
of non-local forms. But it could also be the case that space-
time is even richer than this, involving both the overlaying of
non-local regions and the overlapping of local co-ordinate
patches. In this respect the structure of space would evoke the
structures used by the brain for its visual information
processing, these involve both specific localized regions
within the visual cortex together with a delocalization of visual
information.
Of course it may not necessarily be the case that space and
time together form an inseparable space-time. Neither may
time itself be represented by a single dimension--a line that is
perpendicular to those of space. Moreover it may not be
possible to derive space-time (or space and time) as an
independently existing substratum but rather its complex
properties may appear in conjunction with those of material
process. In another paper11 I have suggested that certain
structures emerge spontaneously out of quantum systems.
These structures would include both material systems and
space-time and would appear at a certain limit of complexity.
The universe in that view has an essential non-unitary, or
creative, nature so that new forms are constantly being thrown
out. An opposing tendency is, by virtue of their overall form, for
old structures to persist as a sort of "habit", or inheritance from
earlier forms. In other words, new forms appear
spontaneously and are then sustained so that unitary
mappings appear as special cases of more general non-
unitary operations. One aspect of this process would be the
appearance of the familiar space-time structure together with
the symmetries associated with the elementary particles and
forces. However this particular approach assumes the general
ideas of quantum theory, which is itself tied up with pre-
existing notions of space and time, so clearly something more
radical is required.
Essentially the goal is to derive the properties of space-time
out of some deeper theory. It is often suggested that, in doing
so, the properties of space-time would be modified in some
way to allow for a successful integration of quantum theory
and general relativity. But must quantum theory necessarily be
the starting point for such a program? The meaning of the
quantum theory is in many respects unclear and its
formulation, in terms of a local space-time, incompatible with
this program. Clearly some more radical approach is needed.
But what would be the features of such an approach? One
could speculate that at least the ideas of wholeness and the
overall importance of the "form" of a description would be
carried over from quantum theory.
And is it possible to attempt a radically different treatment of
space, or space-time, without, at the same time, including a
new description of matter and fields. Indeed is it possible to
separate space-time from process? And what, indeed would
be the status of physical law? Is law external to and imposed
upon material process to give it direction and form? Or does
physical law exist prior to space and time, or is it also
something which evolves and exists only within a prescribed
context? In fact there are no end of speculations and
theoretical starting points possible. What seems to be
required at this time are new and deeper philosophical ideas.
These ideas may then act as the impetus for a new approach
in physics, one in which locality, quantum theory and general
relativity would have validity only within certain contexts.
Finally one could point to the need to make a thorough
experimental investigation of non-locality and non-separability.
Some experiments have already been carried out on the non-
classical correlations predicted by Bell's Theorem. But these
have yet to distinguish between non-separability brought
about by something like Bohm's quantum potential and a true
non-locality which transcends any local space-time
description. T. D. Lee has also pointed out the need to probe
space-time properties in quantum theory.12 His suggestion is
to carry out "vacuum engineering", that is, rather than always
focussing on small spatial regions experiments should be
devised which explore coherent phenomena and the
distribution of energy over large spatial volumes. In the
following sections the possibility of non-local correlations
being manifested in sensitive and chaotic systems and in
neutral nets is also discussed.
The whole subject of non-locality in physics could be
compared, by way of illustration, with that of non-linearity. For
two hundred years physics was able to explain a wide range
of phenomena using only linear theories and by explaining
nonlinear effects in terms of a linearized perturbation theory.
But the success of this program lay not so much in the power
of linearization but rather in that physicists simply did not give
much attention to non-linear phenomena and tended to focus
on the considerably simpler linear systems. Today, however,
with the help of modern mathematical techniques and
computer modeling, it has become possible to treat a variety
of non-linear systems. For example, solitons and other non-
linear effects abound in solid state physics where, a decade or
so ago, almost the entire field was described in terms of linear
approximations.
Today linearity is viewed as a special case of non-linearity that
holds only under certain limiting conditions. While, in the past,
physicists saw linear systems all around them, today they deal
in non-linearity. It may also be possible that locality and certain
forms of causality will one day be seen as limiting cases of a
more general non-local holism, for our current paradigms of
physics may be blinding us to different ways of seeing.
Yet locality has served physics well, which implies that our
hypothetical underlying non-local effects must be extremely
subtle. So where should we look for them? Supposing that
true non-locality is present quite generally in the universe: how
would it manifest itself? I suggest that the most promising
place to look is in these extraordinarily sensitive non-linear
systems that are termed "chaotic". Systems which suffer
constant iteration and in which every tiny region is contingent
upon all others are known to behave in extremely complicated
ways. Their dynamics are characterized by fractal behavior--in
which endless levels of detail are found at finer and finer
scales. But "chaos" may be a poor term to describe such
systems for it is not so much that they are "random", "anarchic",
or "orderless" as that they have an extremely complex and
subtle order.
These systems are so extraordinarily sensitive that the
smallest perturbation has an uncontrollable and unpredictable
effect upon their dynamics. These are the ideal systems in
which to study non-local effects for their behavior could well
be controlled by the global correlation of vanishingly small
effects. Attempting to control such systems locally proves
useless: on the other hand global, or non-local description
and control may be entirely appropriate. The global co-
ordination of boundary conditions, for example, could act to
guide, in a very general way, the overall form of the system.
Information which is distributed globally as boundary
conditions or very delicate non-local perturbations would be
hidden within the apparent chaos of a sensitive system.
Attention to individual regions of space would not be sufficient
to display this non-local influence. What is required is some
new, global description of these systems.
A simple image will illustrate this point. Local disturbances
propagate through a system and are normally assumed to
dissipate themselves, becoming lost in the random
fluctuations of the medium. But in a world in which events are
correlated non-locally what may appear to be a vanishingly
small random fluctuation may in fact be the manifestation of a
global order. Extremely small perturbations, when correlated
non-locally could, for example, have the effect of initiating an
inwardly moving wave of disturbance which then interferes co-
operatively and gives rise to a large local disturbance. This is
the reversal of what is normally assumed, in which an effect
spreads out and is dissipated. I am therefore suggesting that
local events in such systems can have a non-local origin. More
generally I propose that sensitive dynamical systems may be
guided by non-local effects and are best understood using a
non-local description. The possibility of non-local control in
chaotic and sensitive systems is far-reaching.
There are a wide variety of systems in nature that have the
characteristics of "chaos", or rather of complex, non-local
order. In such systems rather than causes producing effects of
a similar magnitude it may be more a matter of very tiny, but
globally coordinated causes having a wide range of global
effects. The size of the cause is no longer related to the
magnitude of the effect, what is important is the overall form of
that cause. Moreover what appear as "random fluctuations"
may be highly significant aspects of global behavior. Life
forms a particularly important subset of these globally complex
systems. It may be valuable to consider its processes from a
non-local perspective. Life "rides the wave" and lives on a
delicate knife edge between order and chaos. Some form of
non-local correlation of dynamics is, I would suggest,
characteristic of living systems.
Other aspects of non-locality could be the appearance of
similar structures or dynamical patterns at widely differing
scales of space, time and energy throughout the universe. In
the case of a non-local description it may be possible for
direct connections to exist between the large and the small
scale . Moreover the existence of very delicate, but globally
correlated effects, could have a major influence over the form
of a system. It is certainly true that many patterns recur
throughout the animate and inanimate world. In some cases
they are clearly due to a balance of certain natural local forces,
in others, however, they may be the manifestation of gentle
non-local promptings. Indeed it may be possible that even the
large scale structure of the universe, with all its puzzles (such
as the so-called Great Wall), could be partially influenced by
weak non-local forces.
One of the most complex and sensitive systems in nature is
the human brain and again I would suggest that a significant
part of its activity takes place in a non-local fashion. In the
brain activity appears to sweep in from all over the cortex,
focus in a particular area then move out again. Electrical
activity, which is admittedly only a part of the brain's total
function, appears to involve a constant transformation between
the local and the global. Again it would be interesting to
consider the possibility that the brain is both generating and
responding to certain non-local signals which give form to its
otherwise locally determined electrical activity
A particular example would be memory which does not
appear to have any fixed location within the brain: rather a
name, a particular texture, taste or smell will evoke a whole
complex of sensations--memories of places, conversations,
faces, smells, tastes, sounds and so on. Suppose that
memories are encoded non-locally so that a particular
recollection is not totally determined by the sensitivity of
groups of synapses but arises through a non-local correlation
of the activity of whole sections of the cortex. A particular
memory will be enfolded with many others and its particular
presentation in consciousness would be the result both of the
overall form of the particular memory-trigger and the creativity
of the human mind. In this way a memory would not be an
isolated fact but a whole spectrum of sensations, feelings and
encoded events that are enfolded together. (The holonomic
theory of memory (of Pribram and others13) involves
information that is distributed by analogy to a hologram. But
here something more radically non-local is being proposed.)
Memory storage. of course, need not consist solely of the
electrochemical sensitivities associated with synapses but
may also take the form of subtle, non-local coordination of
neurochemical reactions and even of muscular-skeletal
dispositions and, indeed, the activity of the whole body. In turn,
memories flow into thought and action, the whole spectrum
moving out into the wider context of society and
communication.
Research and theoretical modeling that is based upon locality,
and on the absolute separation between meaning and
material process in the brain, is clearly not going to reveal this
more subtle level of the non-local activity of matter/meaning.
The suggestion being made in this essay is that it may be
useful to entertain at least the possibility of discussing and
investigating the brain in different ways. One immediate
practical approach would be to consider the theoretical
implications of non-locality in neural-net processing.
Computer simulations of such neural nets, and actual nets
themselves, have become quite fashionable at the moment. In
one sense a neural net could be said to be global in its
approach to information processing. Yet its foundation is local,
with activity being determined by the state of each node.
Suppose however that the sensitivity of nodes is correlated in
a non-local fashion, would this, for example, enable the net to
operate in what could be called a non-algorithmic fashion?
What advantages would such non-local correlations have for
an information-processing device? Clearly this would
represent a theoretical step to what could be termed a
quantum-computer in which the state of the computer is
determined by the whole system. In such a hypothetical
computer distant parts may be correlated and it may not be
possible to split up its activity into separable parts, for the
overall form of the computer's wave function would determine
its activity. (Of course under certain conditions a sort of limited
separability would be possible as is the case with molecules
which can, to a certain degree of approximation, be treated as
independent. However, this very separability and relative
independence is a function of the form of the overall system.)
Of course a quantum computer is not a brain. Nevertheless a
theoretical investigation of the implications of non-locality may
suggest new ways of investigating and thinking about the
brain.
What is being proposed in this essay is that the mind, the brain
and the universe can be looked upon in a radically different
light. The notion of non-locality brings with it a new attitude to
separability, to material bodies and force, and to the
distinction between information and material process. In
essence what I am suggesting is that a more subtle level
operates within the universe.14 The existence of this level has
been hinted at by recent quantum mechanical experiments
and, more directly, by our own experience. There are a
number of inroads into its investigation, a discussion of non-
locality being only one of them. In summary therefore, the
essay proposes that non-locality operates throughout the
universe and not simply at the quantum level. Non-locality
could be considered as a complementary description to that of
locality, as part of a general nexus of new ideas, or as the
starting point of a radically new approach to science.
REFERENCES
1. Recent discussions of Bell's Theorem and its experimental
verification include: Kafatos, Menas (ed.) (1989) Bell's
Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe,
Kulwer Academic Publishers, Dortrecht and Cushing, James.
T and McMullin, Ernan (eds.) (1989) Philosophical
Consequences of Quantum Theory, University of Notre Dame
Press, Indiana.
2. Born, M (ed) (1971) The Born-Einstein Letters, Macmillan
Publishers, London.
3. Peat, F. David (1989) 'Bell's Theorem: Form and Information
in Quantum Theory' in Kafatos, Menas (1989) Bell's Theorem,
Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe, Kulwer
Academic Publishers, Dortrecht; and 'Non-locality: Bell's
Theorem, Condensed States and the Form of the Wave
Function' (1990) (unpublished)
4. Bohm, D and Hiley, B.J. (1989) 'Non-Locality and Locality in
the Stocastic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics', Physics
Reports, 172 (3), 93-122.
5. Peat, F. David ( October 1989) 'I've got a Map in My Head',
Paper given at the Smithsonian Museum conference on
Patterns in the Universe. To be published in a conference
proceedings edited by Kafatos, Menas. See also Bohm, David
and Peat, F. David (1987) Science, Order and Creativity,
Bantam Books, New York.
6. Ford, Alan, J and Peat, F. David (1988) 'The Role of
Language in Science', Foundations of Physics, 18, 1233-1242.
7. Fauconnier, G, (1985), Mental Spaces: Aspects of meaning
construction in natural language, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge.
8. Bohm, David, Hiley, B.J. and Kaloyerou, P.N. (1987) 'An
Ontological Basis for the Quantum Theory' (Parts I. and II.)
Physics Reports, 6, 323-374.
9. Bohm, David (1980) Wholeness and the Implicate Order,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
10. Penrose, R. and Rindler, W. (1987) Spinors and Space
Time (volume 2), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
11. Peat, F. David, (1988) 'Time, Structure and Objectivity in
Quantum Theory', Foundations of Physics, 18, 1213-1231.
12. Lee, T. D. Particle Physics and Introduction to Field
Theory, pp 824-828, Harwood Academic Publishers, Chur.
13. Pribram, K.H., Nuwer, M. and Baron, R. (1974) 'The
holographic hypothesis of memory structure in brain function
and perception' in Atkinson, R.C., Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.C. and
Suppes, P. (eds.), Contemporary Developments in
Mathematical Phychology, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
14. See also Peat, F. David (1989) 'Gentle Action for a
Harmonious World', Edges: New Planetary Patterns (Toronto),
2 (3), 8-46.